Title
Serina vs. Caballero
Case
G.R. No. 127382
Decision Date
Aug 17, 2004
Petitioners claimed ownership of 2.5-hectare land via deed and tax payments, but failed to prove land identity or acquisitive prescription; Supreme Court dismissed their claim.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 127382)

Antecedents

The petitioners filed their complaint on August 11, 1982, asserting they are the absolute owners of a 2.5-hectare parcel of land (Lot No. 3533-A) and have been in possession for over thirty-five years. They claimed to have purchased the land from Lucia Vda. de Marbella, supported by a Deed of Sale dated August 23, 1947. Discovering that Victor Caballero claimed ownership and was offering the property for sale, the petitioners sought legal redress. Following the death of Dr. Jesus SeriAa on August 6, 1983, his children were substituted as parties to the case.

Respondents' Position

In their answer, the respondents asserted ownership based on a longer history of possession, claiming that the disputed land was part of Cadastral Lot No. 3533 inherited from Eustaquio Caballero, and presented a tax declaration (No. 2442) for the property despite records being destroyed during the war. They contested the petitioners’ ownership and highlighted discrepancies in the ownership documents, specifically regarding the land’s boundaries and area.

Regional Trial Court Judgment

The RTC ruled in favor of the respondents on January 21, 1992, dismissing the petitioners’ complaint. The RTC found that the petitioners failed to conclusively demonstrate that the land in their possession was the same as that claimed by them, particularly due to inconsistencies in the boundaries and area described in the various declarations and deeds.

Court of Appeals Affirmation

Upon appeal, the CA upheld the RTC decision, leading to further petition for review by the petitioners. They raised two main issues: (1) whether they established the identity of the land; and (2) whether the concept of acquisitive prescription should be applied in their favor.

Issues on Land Identity

The Supreme Court reiterated that the determination of factual identities such as property boundaries falls outside the jurisdiction of a petition for review on certiorari, which focuses on errors of law. It pointed out that the CA’s affirmation of the RTC's factual findings must be based on substantial evidence, and the CA concluded that the petitioners failed to demonstrate that the land in dispute is the same as that referenced in their ownership claims.

Examination of Boundaries and Evidence

The discrepancies cited included different boundary owners listed, an inconsistency in the area (2.5 hectares claimed versus the 5 hectares in the Deed of Sale), and conflicting locations provided in the documentation. The CA noted that such inconsistencies are paramount in disputes of land ownership, as the one claiming ownership must demonstrate clearly the identity of the property, which the petitioners failed to accomplish.

Acquisitive Prescripti

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.